jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Oct 28, 2012 0:40:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Oct 28, 2012 8:58:16 GMT -5
Just came back from seeing" Argo". While the movie was done well, I don't feel that Ben Affleck deserves an Oscar for it. I guess I'm just prejudiced. It was funny how the movie showed the coming attractions, first Les Mis (the old trailer, but the first time I saw it on the big screen :o), Lincoln, and then Argo the main feature. I just hope that's the way the academy see's it!!! This is the review I had posted on the Les Miserables board at IMDB. I mostly expressed my thoughts on the Best Picture & Best Actor possibilities: Upon re-reading it I still feel the same way. There is also a lot of buzz about Best Director for Affleck...maybe I'm missing something but I don't see it for either Best Director or Best Picture. Someone at IMDB said that Affleck isn't actually being touted for Best Actor after all, so that's good news. Sue |
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Oct 28, 2012 9:08:16 GMT -5
Sue, Some of the posts on IMDb could be inane, insane - LOL! But since I think these message boards are populated by mostly fanboys/young men ( and a few fangirls) with their brand of humor - I can understand and even sometimes read through the trolling posts ( if done with good humor). I am used to this because I do post ( more "lurk" than post) on a sports message board for Formula One - and they sometimes make me laugh/giggle as only sophomoric humor can. They even disagree in style! For a long time, nobody wanted to talk about Les Mis - except for that longish thread ( 5 pages) on Hugh's chances for an Oscar ( Thanks for adding your comments to that one). I think that may change once the screenings start...although I do not expect them all to be impressed - as many are avowed musicals haters. LOL! Young men usually say that...and even more mature, older men! Not long now -- maybe after a month, we may start to hear real buzz?? Jo Oh the 'I hate musicals' crowd crack me up. I always think why are you here then?? LOL! They always play it like it's some kind of a macho badge of honor or something. Quite silly really! I'm with you, Jo...can't wait till the real screenings start being talked about. I really think it's going to blow the socks off most of the lucky folks who get to see it. Wish I was one of them. I think it will certainly up the buzz factor for all the awards possibilities. Sue |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Oct 30, 2012 8:37:54 GMT -5
Here comes the ugly part of the competition -- Deadline Hollywood reports on the controversy re the DGA screening. You may want to read the full report. www.deadline.com/2012/10/dga-sparks-concern-race-heating-up/There is already a lot of talk about the overly aggressive LINCOLN campaign being undertaken by both Spielberg and Day-Lewis. Check out some of the message boards. Maybe Joaquin Phoenix was probably just articulating the dirty goings-on behind the scenes when he made those derisive comments about the Oscar competition? Or is it because Harvey Weinstein has been trumped by Spielberg's campaign tactics  But there is also some information on the screening schedules that Les Miserables will be involved in, as all others will be -- >>>But the concern about something like an extra guild screening just shows the tension already out there about a race that is heating up early and with less time to get those all-important voters in to see your film. Expect it to continue like this for the next four months, and maybe especially during the normally quiet holidays because with the condensed voting period there won’t be much of a holiday break at all in the Oscar game this year. Even Thanksgiving weekend will be used in a bigger way than usual to get late-breaking films seen. Universal, for one, plans to have multiple screenings and Q&As for key voting groups of their December 25th release Les Miserables that weekend and other studios plan similar strategies to get their movies out front for Academy and guild voters. DVD screeners have so far been slow to land in Academy mailboxes with only a handful of smaller titles delivered so far. That process should really heat up quickly, even for big studio titles that fear piracy. This year they will just have to get them all out there in the next seven weeks (some like Les Miserables even before they open) or risk falling behind.<<<Sigh - why does it have to be like this? Although I really don't mind the report by Deadline that "some like Les Miserables even before they open"  Hugh will be busy, between LA and NYC, but maybe mostly in Hollywood? I guess the fact that there has been no delay in the filming schedule of The Wolverine has been reassuring. He and James Mangold said in the chat that they will wrap in a few weeks! Jo |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Oct 31, 2012 10:10:26 GMT -5
A film blogger on GoldDerby traces the Oscar success of past musicals.
>>>Films Awards Blog
Will 'Les Miserables' rekindle Oscar's love affair with musicals?
By Zachary Laws
Oct 31 2012 | 01:40 am
On paper, "Les Miserables" seems like the perfect Oscar movie. With its prestigious source material, all-star cast, period setting and epic scope, the film looks poised to garner a high number of nominations. Eight of our Experts are predicting it to win Best Picture, giving it odds of 11 to 2, behind frontrunner "Argo."
"Les Miserables" belongs to one of the academy’s most beloved genres: the movie musical. Well, at times one of their most beloved genres, that is. The academy has had a love/hate relationship with the movie musical over its eighty-five years, either rewarding or ignoring films built on song-and-dance numbers.
Musicals have been winning Oscars since the earliest days of the awardsfest: "The Broadway Melody"(1929) was the second film ever to win Best Picture. After that came wins for "The Great Ziegfeld" (1936), "An American in Paris" (1951), "Gigi" (1958), "West Side Story" (1961), "My Fair Lady" (1964), "The Sound of Music" (1965) and "Oliver!" (1968).
During that same period, Best Picture nominations went to: "42nd Street" (1932), "Top Hat" (1935), "The Wizard of Oz" (1939), "Yankee Doodle Dandy" (1942), "Anchors Aweigh" (1945), "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers" (1954), "The King and I" (1957), "The Music Man" (1962), "Mary Poppins" (1964), "Doctor Dolittle" (1967) and "Funny Girl" (1968).
Yet after the win for "Oliver!" only a scant six musicals -- "Hello, Dolly!" (1969), "Fiddler on the Roof" (1971), "Cabaret" (1972), "All That Jazz" (1979), "Beauty and the Beast" (1991) and "Moulin Rouge!" (2001) -- received nominations for Best Picture before "Chicago" took the top prize in 2002.
One could easily blame the lack of nominations on a scarcity of product, as the movie musical had fallen out of favor with the public after such big-budget flops as "Star!" (1968), "Paint Your Wagon" (1969) and "Darling Lili" (1970). The win for "Chicago" was seen as a rebirth of the all but dead genre and, with that, Hollywood quickly churned out a number of Broadway adaptations eager to reap similar success.
Unfortunately, such success was not easily wrought. Several high-profile projects such as "Dreamgirls" (2006), "Sweeney Todd" (2007) and "Nine" (2009), all thought to be front-runners early on, came up short with Oscar voters. Indeed, since "Chicago"’s win not a single movie musical has been nominated for Best Picture. This can’t be blamed entirely on the quality of the films being produced, but rather on the ever-changing tastes of the academy.
Yet the academy’s recent resistance to the movie musical may go even deeper than changing tastes. The musical, by its very nature, is a more light-hearted kind of entertainment, and the academy is known to have its limits when it comes to rewarding less serious-minded product.
Looking back on the musicals nominated for Best Picture, one finds such classics of the genre as "Meet Me in St. Louis" (1944), "Singin’ in the Rain" (1952), and "The Band Wagon" (1953) absent from the list. These films lacked the serious subject matter of some of the musicals that gained favor with the academy. It would appear that while the movie musical is considered awards bait because of its genre, it is also disregarded as such for that same reason.
Now comes "Les Miserables," as serious-minded a movie musical as there ever was. It takes for its subject matter no less than poverty, death, and redemption in 19th century France. The film is based on one of the most acclaimed and beloved shows in history: after its London premiere in 1985, the show came to Broadway in 1987 and played over 7,000 performances, making it the third longest-running show in rialto history (behind "Cats" and "Phantom of the Opera"). That original production won eight Tony Awards, including Best Musical. A film adaptation has been in the works for over twenty years and, needless to say, expectations are high.
The film itself certainly has a high pedigree of its own: directed by Tom Hooper, fresh off his Oscar win for "The King’s Speech" (2010), starring Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway and Amanda Seyfried, as well as Helena Bonham Carter, Sacha Baron Cohen, Eddie Redmayne and Samantha Barks. The screenplay is by two-time Oscar-nominee William Nicholson ("Shadowlands,"1993 and "Gladiator," 2000). The show’s original producer, Cameron Mackintosh, is producing the film, and the below-the-line talents are all top-notch.
In addition, "Les Miserables" has the distinction of being the first movie musical since the early days of sound to have all of its songs recorded live on set, as opposed to being pre-recorded in a studio. Obviously the film is being produced at a high level of ambition, and if there’s one thing the academy loves rewarding, it’s films that showcase the best of what Hollywood can do. <<<
*************************************************
Nothing really new to what is already known about past musicals and what he says about Les Miserables. I think the article might have been prodded by the curiousity of why, in the words of the Pete Hammond of Deadline Hollywood, " some people like Les Miserables even before they open". At least they are now starting to talk about the movie!
So, I hope the real assessment of Les Miserables real chances for Oscar honors will come soon -- after the special screenings which start around Thanksgiving weekend.
Jo
|
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Oct 31, 2012 11:02:33 GMT -5
My response to this blog article was: "None of the three negative results musicals you mention "Dreamgirls" (2006), "Sweeney Todd" (2007) and "Nine" (2009) have the history, global success, or emotional impact of Les Mis. Everyone concerned would have to do pratfalls on the scenery and sing totally off key for this not to be a monster success. Even among the "successful" movie musicals, Les Mis is something totally different because of its dramatic elements and philosophy."
|
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 1, 2012 9:40:30 GMT -5
Finally >  :P :-/ www.goldderby.com/films/news/3538/oscars-hugh-jackman-les-miserables-entertainment-news-51860625.html>>> Films Awards BlogAre we underestimating Hugh Jackman's Oscar potential in 'Les Miserables'?By Daniel Montgomery Nov 01 2012 | 06:44 am Our Oscar predictors have narrowed down this year's crowded Best Actor field to a race between four men: Daniel Day-Lewis ("Lincoln"), Joaquin Phoenix ("The Master"), Denzel Washington ("Flight") and John Hawkes ("The Sessions"). All of their films have either opened or screened for the press, but "Les Miserables" and its star Hugh Jackman are still unknown quantities. Universal Pictures has yet to screen the film, so there's still no way to know whether it will stage a last-minute Oscar ambush, or end up like "J. Edgar" or "War Horse" last year: highly anticipated films whose Oscar hopes were dashed when they were finally shown. Nevertheless, our Oscarologists consider it a top contender for Best Picture, with eight currently predicting it to win. (See our latest predictions roundup here.) And 13 expect Anne Hathaway to win Best Supporting Actress. But none are predicting a Best Actor win for Jackman. We currently rank him fifth with 12 to 1 odds. Should our Oscarologists be taking him more seriously? Our forum poster Snuggle4, recent winner of our Oscar predictions contest, indicated in early October that he has seen the film and considers it the frontrunner to win the top prize; he currently ranks Jackman second behind Hawkes in the Best Actor race. See his initial report on the film's chances here. Jackman, on paper, has several factors working in his favor. He is a major Hollywood star, popular within the industry and without; he hosted the 2008 Oscars, and was arguably the best emcee of the past 10 years. He has proven dramatic range, from big-screen action hero to on-stage song-and-dance man, for which he has already won Tony and Emmy Awards. Jackman can even be considered overdue for Oscar recognition. He has worked with directors including James Mangold, Darren Aronofsky, Christopher Nolan, and Woody Allen, all of whom have directed Oscar-winning performances, but he's never been on Oscar's radar. Now headlining a major Best Picture contender, the timing could be right to honor him for the first time. Jackman plays Jean Valjean, who is jailed for stealing a loaf of bread in 19th century France. The role earned Colm Wilkinson a Tony bid for Best Actor in a Musical in 1987, which he lost to Robert Lindsay in "Me and My Girl." In that race, Wilkinson was also up against his costar Terrence Mann, who played his adversary, Inspector Javert. But in the film version, Javert is played by Russell Crowe, who is expected to compete as a supporting actor, so Jackman will have the lead-actor race all to himself. Jackman's biggest challenge could be overcoming Oscar's bias against male marquee idols. Beautiful ingenues often win acting awards, but male heartthrobs seldom do. However, he de-glamorizes for his "Les Mis" role much like fellow hunks George Clooney and Christian Bale, who transformed themselves physically to win Oscars for "Syriana" and "The Fighter," respectively. It will all be moot is "Les Miserables" disappoints, but if it proves equal to its early hype, Jackman could become a Best Actor frontrunner.<<< Jo
|
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 1, 2012 10:05:21 GMT -5
Hey, let's add our comments to Goldderby, to validate what this film blogger thinks at this point could just be speculative. My entry -- It was hard to type on a completely linear space, without edit facilities, but all for the love of and pride in Hugh PS: Thanks, Jamie  Jo |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Nov 1, 2012 13:20:48 GMT -5
Well I was tempted to answer, "UH Duh!" but said this instead:
"It's about time the critics catch up to what his fans have known for years. Jackman can do more with one tilt of his head or quirk of a grin than most actors can do with a two hour script. He is a master of nuance and when the time comes to deliver power and emotionalism, it explodes off the screen - eruptions of acting prowess in what have been at times the mediocre films he has saved. If this all comes to fruition, he now has a vehicle that will reveal the full range of that talent , and it will be a joy to experience."
|
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 2, 2012 20:51:00 GMT -5
Someone is annoyed by the posts of what he calls "Jackman obssessed fans" - check out the comments on the GoldDerby article on Hugh's chances. www.goldderby.com/films/news/3538/oscars-hugh-jackman-les-miserables-entertainment-news-51860625.htmlIt's a good thing I found the quote from Robert Downey, Jr., re Hugh on The Prestige. And if this poster on GoldDerby were thinking logically -- why would GoldDerby publish the article suggesting that Hugh may be a frontrunner for Les Mis after all, why would his name ( not Bale, for TDKR) appear on the Goldderby odds/Oscar predictions, why would his name appear on other film bloggers Oscar predictions...why, why, why?? People must think that the stars are aligning for Hugh on this one -- the role itself, a match to his acting and musical talent and even his very own physicality, a much-loved musical and a well-known literary classic...I doubt he is going to sing off-key ;D All that is needed now is for the movie to be shown! Btw, I doubt that anyone can really steal a scene from Hugh Jackman, movies or stage. All that talk about Anne stealing the movie from him -- argh, argh, argh  But I think it looks like that the publicity is beginning to ramp up for Hugh. And he is their best candidate for talk shows or interviews - check out what he said on the EW and it was good to read! Jo (aka Applause) |
|
|
|
Post by nevaeh777 on Nov 2, 2012 21:52:29 GMT -5
Jo, I like your "Robert Downey Jr" response to "A Closer Look" ! Nice comeback! If ever we needed that second trailer - can it please come NOW!  |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 2, 2012 22:02:07 GMT -5
I have to keep looking for it everytime some annoying Hugh-unbelievers put him down, acting-wise. Lol - I found the RDJ quote only by accident, the first time around. But I think I misquoted the source - it should be the LA TIMES, not the HOLLYWOOD REPORTER ;D articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/10/news/en-favorites10Let me check if I saved the contents of the thread WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT HUGH from the old Ozalot board. Jo |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 3, 2012 11:54:15 GMT -5
Ha -- he replied but I have a feeling I have annoyed him because his reason about Downey recognizing another colleague's work is because Hugh and RDJ must have bonded together in a magazine shoot ( which I have never heard of before...has there been one?). He also made a putdown about XMOrigins which was uncalled for.
Our exchange -- please read his response first:
**************************************************
Jo
Why wouldn't Downey be capable of a professional opinion of a colleague's work, not fair to insinuate that his praise was given only as a personal favor ( because they bonded together over a magazine shoot, even if I have never heard of such an occasion). Why is Bale not being talked about for his TDKR role ( neither for his TDK) despite the hyperbole for both movies...and why is there a buzz about Jackman now? The role of Valjean is centric in Les Miserables, the movie is a great opportunity for Jackman to apply his dramatic and musical talent and including the physicality called for by the role, and the movie itself, from early word of mouth ( there was a first screening at Arclight), promises to be a very, very strong contender. The focus on Jackman's potential Oscar chances is anchored on a rare talent in Hollywood to handle such a role!
Posted 19 min ago
A Closer Look
Saying Jackman "handled it" in one scene in one flick is not a recommendation for an overdue award considering his limited canon of work. Especially considering Downey and Jackman I'm guessing bonded over a magazine shoot they'd done together. I think he was very good in Prestige but I believe it was Bale really shined. That kind of originality is why he, Penn along with others are frequently declared as the best in the business. And hyperbole for all kinds of reasons isn't unheard of in the industry. Consider the way Jackman built up "Origins" as the greatest film since Citizen Kane. *wink*
**************************************************
Anyone care to add more fuel to the fire ? LOL.
Jo
|
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 3, 2012 13:02:39 GMT -5
Sasha Stone, editor for AwardsDaily and film blogger plus Oscar predictor has just tweeted this -- Hugh's stock is rising! And an amusing tweet -- The article referred to is "Are We Underestimating..." Jo |
|
ruby
Auditioning
Posts: 345
|
Post by ruby on Nov 3, 2012 15:51:49 GMT -5
Ha -- he replied but I have a feeling I have annoyed him because his reason about Downey recognizing another colleague's work is because Hugh and RDJ must have bonded together in a magazine shoot ( which I have never heard of before...has there been one?). He also made a putdown about XMOrigins which was uncalled for. Our exchange -- please read his response first:************************************************** Jo Why wouldn't Downey be capable of a professional opinion of a colleague's work, not fair to insinuate that his praise was given only as a personal favor ( because they bonded together over a magazine shoot, even if I have never heard of such an occasion). Why is Bale not being talked about for his TDKR role ( neither for his TDK) despite the hyperbole for both movies...and why is there a buzz about Jackman now? The role of Valjean is centric in Les Miserables, the movie is a great opportunity for Jackman to apply his dramatic and musical talent and including the physicality called for by the role, and the movie itself, from early word of mouth ( there was a first screening at Arclight), promises to be a very, very strong contender. The focus on Jackman's potential Oscar chances is anchored on a rare talent in Hollywood to handle such a role! Posted 19 min ago A Closer Look Saying Jackman "handled it" in one scene in one flick is not a recommendation for an overdue award considering his limited canon of work. Especially considering Downey and Jackman I'm guessing bonded over a magazine shoot they'd done together. I think he was very good in Prestige but I believe it was Bale really shined. That kind of originality is why he, Penn along with others are frequently declared as the best in the business. And hyperbole for all kinds of reasons isn't unheard of in the industry. Consider the way Jackman built up "Origins" as the greatest film since Citizen Kane. *wink* ************************************************** Anyone care to add more fuel to the fire ? LOL. Jo The photo shoot with RDJ was the B/W one with Sting and some models. Was it Vanity Fair? Had a birthday cake and one with them at urinals. |
|
|
|
Post by nevaeh777 on Nov 3, 2012 23:52:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nevaeh777 on Nov 4, 2012 0:29:30 GMT -5
Ha -- he replied but I have a feeling I have annoyed him because his reason about Downey recognizing another colleague's work is because Hugh and RDJ must have bonded together in a magazine shoot ( which I have never heard of before...has there been one?). He also made a putdown about XMOrigins which was uncalled for. Our exchange -- please read his response first:************************************************** Jo Why wouldn't Downey be capable of a professional opinion of a colleague's work, not fair to insinuate that his praise was given only as a personal favor ( because they bonded together over a magazine shoot, even if I have never heard of such an occasion). Why is Bale not being talked about for his TDKR role ( neither for his TDK) despite the hyperbole for both movies...and why is there a buzz about Jackman now? The role of Valjean is centric in Les Miserables, the movie is a great opportunity for Jackman to apply his dramatic and musical talent and including the physicality called for by the role, and the movie itself, from early word of mouth ( there was a first screening at Arclight), promises to be a very, very strong contender. The focus on Jackman's potential Oscar chances is anchored on a rare talent in Hollywood to handle such a role! Posted 19 min ago A Closer Look Saying Jackman "handled it" in one scene in one flick is not a recommendation for an overdue award considering his limited canon of work. Especially considering Downey and Jackman I'm guessing bonded over a magazine shoot they'd done together. I think he was very good in Prestige but I believe it was Bale really shined. That kind of originality is why he, Penn along with others are frequently declared as the best in the business. And hyperbole for all kinds of reasons isn't unheard of in the industry. Consider the way Jackman built up "Origins" as the greatest film since Citizen Kane. *wink* ************************************************** Anyone care to add more fuel to the fire ? LOL. Jo I added mine Jo. He keeps focusing on the fact that Hugh doesn't have the "canon" or "body of work" to back up receiving an Oscar, which is crap. This is what I responded: "A Closer Look" We are not denying that Christian Bale is a good actor. He is an amazing performer and totally earned his Oscar in "The Fighter". But, what you are saying is that the Academy only takes into consideration a "body of work" for an actor to be worthy of receiving an Oscar, and that is not always the case. On many occasions an actor has been awarded because the role they played was incredible and they earned the Oscar just on that performance alone. Some actors even received an Oscar for their first film performance! An example of that is Jennifer Hudson. She made her film debut in "Dreamgirls" in 2006 and won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for that role (along with a Golden Globe, BAFTA and a SAG Award). She was brilliant in the role and so was awarded for it. She had no "body of work" in film prior to that. Regardless of Hugh's past performances, we believe this role of Jean Valjean is what is going to make everyone sit up and take notice that this actor has a great talent and is worthy of that gold statue. Only when the film comes out will anyone be able to truly judge his performance. Those who have already had the priviledge to see this film or some of the scenes in it, have said that Jackman shines in this movie. We believe he's going to do just that, and showcase tremendous talent in this film and that he's worth sitting among the Oscar nominees of 2012. |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 4, 2012 6:33:33 GMT -5
Thanks, all :-*
Jo
|
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 5, 2012 8:16:56 GMT -5
Pete Hammond of Deadlline Hollywood analyzes the impact of the changes in the AMPAS rules -- www.deadline.com/2012/11/oscars-rule-changes-awards-season/ Particular mention on the impact on Les Miserables -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Although the actual process of casting a ballot will be easier for members with laptops or iPads, the real challenge is the truncated time period that members will now have to see all the movies, particularly those released in December.
In fact, on the very day the Academy announced this seismic change, Universal moved the release date of its big Oscar hopeful, Les Miserables, from Dec. 14 to Christmas Day, seemingly giving voters less time to see the film. However, the consultant I spoke with didn’t seem concerned.
“We will begin screening heavily at the end of November,” the consultant says. “There is such want-to-see on this movie within the Academy I don’t believe we will have any problem getting members in on time to consider it. But you have to remember that, first and foremost, the studio is most interested in picking the date that works in the best interest of the film’s box office prospects. And Dec. 25, right in the heart of the holiday (season), seemed a perfect choice.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Intersting comment on the priority assigned to maximize box office potential. Also interesting is their sense of self-assurance re AMPAS's interest in the movie ( “There is such want-to-see on this movie within the Academy I don’t believe we will have any problem getting members in on time to consider it.") Jo |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 7, 2012 17:30:35 GMT -5
Someone must have photoshopped this --- because I doubt Universal would have released a FYC ( For Your Consideration) ad even before the special screenings for awards bodies  Amen!! |
|
|
|
Post by ocjackie on Nov 7, 2012 23:42:58 GMT -5
I know I saw a different trailer tonight. It was on ABC. I thought it was going to be the same one because of the way it started. But then you saw Russell on his horse and it was different. It had some of the same cuts with Anne getting her hair cut, and I was wondering if this was the 2nd trailer. Help me guys, did anyone see this one? |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire on Nov 7, 2012 23:47:39 GMT -5
I saw it, too. It was the second of the two just released TV trailers they put out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Nov 8, 2012 3:03:04 GMT -5
Two alternating 30 second commercials. I've never enjoyed watching political shows so much. Pure genius to put it in rotation on a night when people are voting. |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,434
|
Post by jo on Nov 8, 2012 7:29:23 GMT -5
Jackie,
There were two types of TV spots --
*The first one is the new one lasting 30 seconds
*The longer one is a revised version of the original teaser, with new scenes introduced.
Nobody has seen the official new trailer, which was shown with some screenings of SKYFALL in the UK. People say it may not be attached to SKYFALL when it is released in the USA this weekend.
Jo
|
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Nov 8, 2012 9:31:23 GMT -5
I know I saw a different trailer tonight. It was on ABC. I thought it was going to be the same one because of the way it started. But then you saw Russell on his horse and it was different. It had some of the same cuts with Anne getting her hair cut, and I was wondering if this was the 2nd trailer. Help me guys, did anyone see this one? Everyone kept saying the TV spots were running during election coverage on the local NBC stations so I watched mine but didn't see the spots.  I ended up watching the new one called Medley online. Then I kept seeing announcements/links saying there were " 2 new TV spots" but when I clicked on the links for the second one called I Dreamed A Dream I thought it was the same one we've been seeing since May so the first few times I didn't watch it all the way through. When I finally did watch it, I realized it was a new version of that one. I was happy with the first one (Medley) but as for the second one, I find it annoying that they would just revamp the old one instead of making something completely new and I'm starting to hate IDaD!!!
I'm so ready for a trailer with Hugh singing!! Sue |
|
:P :-/
I ended up watching the new one called Medley online. Then I kept seeing announcements/links saying there were "2 new TV spots" but when I clicked on the links for the second one called I Dreamed A Dream I thought it was the same one we've been seeing since May so the first few times I didn't watch it all the way through. When I finally did watch it, I realized it was a new version of that one.